Work telling us we wont get opportunity's if we don't show our faces?

[lovemenomore]

Hi all,

Wanted to know if IABU for being peed off/demoralised at this message from the owner of the company I work for.

Basically started the job in Jan & it has been 100% remote due to Covid/office closed etc. Since the restrictions have lifted I have been in and met colleagues but continued to wfh as do 75% of the company. There has been talk of us never having to go back in full time and people can choose what to do. Nothing formal has been announced. If we do want to go in we have had to book in. However the other day this was posted on our internal comms site;

"While booking is now no longer required, we are noting who turns up. Expect those that do to get the best opportunities and progression. It's obvious that being 'front and centre' means you are top of mind. We've always been a company that prioritises what you do and achieve over simple time served, this is just one aspect of that."

What are your thoughts? To me that is saying if you dont come in you will not be given the opportunities....

Lots of the staff arent local and live all over the country/world. A few of my colleagues are miffed but some friends have said all companies are like this?

@ActonSquirrel
As an employment solicitor what do you think about the potential for indirect discrimination in the employer's communication?
I agree with @MurielSpriggs that we can expect to see it in a tribunal quite soon btw!

[quote DameCelia]@ActonSquirrel
As an employment solicitor what do you think about the potential for indirect discrimination in the employer's communication?
I agree with @MurielSpriggs that we can expect to see it in a tribunal quite soon btw![/quote]
I'm not an employment solicitor. Where did I say I was?

For anyone who has been in their jobs from before March 2020, then surely this is just a return to the conditions under which they accepted their jobs?? The 16 months wfh was a benefit, but the vagus try d of employment and normal place of work have not actually changed for many people. I get that external factors regarding childcare, public transport etc may have done, which affects individuals differently, but the employer incentivising people to come back to work under their normal conditions is not unreasonable.

Being able to wfh sometimes, even if it's only the odd day when the washing machine needs fixing or similar, is still a huge benefit.

Sorry @ActonSquirrel
I saw 'settlement' and thought 'agreement' rather than litigation/matrimonial/PI (other legal disciplines are available).

* They'll favour the people who go above whats required and develop stronger relationships with collegues/management for promotions. Makes sense. It's always been the case, don't know why they're even telling you.*

^This. YABU

@DameCelia

Sorry *@ActonSquirrel* I saw 'settlement' and thought 'agreement' rather than litigation/matrimonial/PI (other legal disciplines are available).

That's ok. I meant JSM or joint settlement meeting. Very much in litigation.

Not everyone wants to be 'seen' and be 'promoted' and 'impress the head honchos'.

So for people who fall into that category it’s fine. The company aren’t saying you will be fired or demoted. They’re just pointing out it may be harder to progress. If that’s not for you then it’s a non issue.

‘Lots of the staff arent local and live all over the country/world’

If their contracts require them to work in X location, then they were U to assume that this would change, in the medium to long term.

Completely fine for your company to say this. They are basically saying they want people in the office, but still giving some flexibility. It’s not a right to work from home, peoples commutes or childcare are not the companies responsibility.

Of course those in the office who are interacting, making working relationships and helping others will be the first people to get opportunities and promotions. Promotions generally come with more responsibility and management, you can’t manage staff whilst sitting at home, they need to be mentored and helped in the office.

I also cant believe people are even questioning it, it’s pretty obvious this would happen. And those who moved far away or set up childcare around permanent working from home are just stupid to do so without formal agreement of wfh arrangements with their employer.

@itsgettingwierd

Don't see it's an unfair policy. Those who make most effort should be seen for promotion over those whove been there longest.

However..... I would hope that work produced is still taken into account.

It would be awful if someone who came in and chatted to colleagues and networked management got promoted over someone who didn't but productively for the company they achieve more before they WFH without the distractions and a long commute that makes them less productive.

It won’t be taken into account in most companies. No senior manager had time to go through everyone’s work and decide who’s done best that way, it’s not school. It’s all about who they know, whose made the effort to have a relationship with them, who makes their presence known, who is well thought of and highly regarded amongst all managers, not just their immediate team. Those who sit at home and just quietly get on with work will be overlooked.

In my industry, a lot of early career to middle rank promotions and secondments are diagonal, so having a profile is important. If you're WFH, you're not getting known outside your team, and that would hold you back. You would also be less likely to pick up on important projects happening within other functions so may miss opportunities to proactively put your hand up for things/ get your foot in the door. You learn a lot at the coffee machine, and it's a great equaliser. Much easier to mention to the CEO in smalltalk that you're involved in a major project than march into his office and say "I just did a massive deal. Promote me now, dammit"

Our employer said similar, several employees pointed out the very obvious discrimination this would cause for employees with disabilities, plus they had knowingly employed people in other parts of the UK on the promise of being able to work from home.

I think it's unfair and short-sighted. It endorses presenteeism, makes it harder for people to be evaluated objectively on their performance and favours those who can hang around and go to the pub after work.

@SimonJT

Our employer said similar, several employees pointed out the very obvious discrimination this would cause for employees with disabilities, plus they had knowingly employed people in other parts of the UK on the promise of being able to work from home.

Out of interest, were any of these people grasping to clutch onto something to justify working from home continuing arsed about people with disabilities before? What were they doing to try and address the issue and make the workplace more accessible?

In my early career I was coached about the importance of networking. Surely everyone knows the adage it's who you know, not what you know? Some people will be able to maintain a profile and relationships remotely, but most will do it much more successfully if they're in the office.

The company don't need an official announcement on it, it's what will happen naturally. This way they're being transparent and warning you this is what will happen if you make that choice.

You absolutely can manage and mentor staff well while WFH.

Shame that they seem to prefer someone to do average work in the office than to do outstanding work at home then.

Interesting point but just thought I'd give another perspective as a business owner, there can be other factors at play other than how god you are at your role, the contact/relationship you have with the rest of your team ,the wider skills you have and the benefits those skills can bring the organisation as a whole. Just doing your role very well isnt always what gets you further and if you are wfh they wont get to see everything you do compared to those there.
I have had staff be outstanding at their role but who wont help out during difficult times and stick rigidly to their hrs. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this at all, however, some have been average at their role and where needed have gone above and beyond during difficult times in different areas and therefor showing different skill sets and strengths.
This has meant the absolute world to us as employers we gladly invest further time and effort in the average employee, further developing these other skills we have seen resulting in them may be progressing/gaining more responsibility. Unfortunately the employee just sticking to their role, whilst again absolutely nothing wrong with this, we dont get to see futher potential as they only stick to what they do. Even if the outstanding worker does more this would be harder to see/monitor and develop furhter if they are wfh.

Another company I know were making redundancies, one great at his job but stuck to contract, the other struggled with his job but was always on hand when the company needed help, they decided to keep the latter as long term they knew they could not only support him in his role but could potentially develop him in other areas making his role more flexible.

@ForgotAboutThis

You absolutely can manage and mentor staff well while WFH.

"You" can but most managers can't. Lots of managers aren't very good - they are people good at whatever the business does, (or good at building a positive profile) rather than at managing people. That's a failing of the employers perhaps, but if working in the office is what works best for them and the managers they employ, that's what they'll prefer.

Basically it’s a threat, if you don’t show your face then we won’t consider you for promotion. Fair enough, unless an underlying issue anyone who is a good performer will show their face regularly. They are saying it’s key, so people need to acknowledge that.

Perhaps managers should take this opportunity to up-skill and develop a modern, resilient, dynamic workforce rather than returning to old style 9-5 presenteeism. Workplaces that learn nothing from this experience are going to find it hard to recruit and retain talent in the future.

I think it’s an oversimplification to think that WFH = not visible/productive, working in the office = visible and productive. Especially in an organisation with a big geographic spread. The dynamic hard workers will be noticed as such even if they only come in once a month; equally, managers will notice the people who decide to go into a half-empty office to fanny about all day and aren’t producing much actual work.

I think they are just saying it as it is.
Most people I know who want to continue are not looking for further progression

If I have a big project on I am more likely to pick people i can see to work with me on it